From: Carl W. Conrad (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 11:14:22 EST
At 11:04 AM -0500 2/12/01, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>> At 12:34 AM -0500 2/12/01, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>> >> Mark wrote...
>> >> James 2:24
>> >> > hORATE TOINUN hOTI EX ERGWN DIKAIOUTAI ANQRWPOS
>> >> > KAI OUK EK PISTEWS MONON
>> >> > "and not only (justified) by faith."
>> >> > --------------------------------------
>> >> Moon wrote...
>> >> > Here adverb MONON modifies adverb EK PISTEWS. We can
>> >> > render as follows:
>> >> >
>> >> > and not (justified) only by faith.
>> >> [Alan]
>> >> I think Mark's suggestion preserves the TWO
>> >> JUSTIFICATIONS being contrasted; Moon's translation
>> >> seems to be viewing ONE JUSTIFICATION from 'two
>> >> different ways.' James is not disputing a
>> >> justification by faith (vs 23). (Note only that James
>> >> quotes from Gen. 15 in this verse, not Gen. 22)
>> >> I tentatively would opt for the implied verb as Mark's
>> >> translation has it, but also wonder ...
>> >> From a grammatical view, is there any material
>> >> difference had MONON preceded the prepositional
>> >> phrase?
>> >OU MONON EK PISTEWS makes OU negate MONON
>> >so that the rendering would be:
>> >and (justified) not only by faith.
>> >This in fact conveys the same as Mark's rendering:
>> > and not only (justified) by faith.
>> >The above analysis seems to imply that the rendering of
>> >the original as "and not (justified) only by faith"
>> >[is] the intended meaning.
>> Am I missing something here? I think that Moon is right to say that MONON
>> governs/limits EK PISTEWS in this instance, but even if the elements were
>> to be arranged as OU MONON EK PISTEWS, the OU would STILL be governing the
>> implicit verb DIKAIOUTAI and the meaning would, I believe, still be the
>> same, as Alan asserted.
>Right, Carl, OU MONON EK PISTEWS and OU EK PISTEWS MONON mean the same.
>But we need to decide where to position the implied verb DIKAIOUNTAI
>relative to OU MONON EK PISTEWS/ OU EK PISTEWS MONON, either (1) or (2):
>(1) (justified) not only by faith.
>(2) not (justified) only by faith.
>If we accept (1), we would have: justified not only by faith but also
>If we accept (2), we would have: justified by works, not just by faith.
>Is there any way to resolve this problem?
I would have thought so; as I see it, the OU is implicitly governing
DIKAIOUTAI either way. I understand that you were saying the OU governs
MONON if it were written OU MONON EK PISTEWS, but I don't really think
that's true. I would say that the more common position for MONON is
following what it limits, so that the phrasing in our text as given OUK EK
PISTEWS MONON is what's to be expected, but I think that if the adverbial
MONON precedes PISTEWS, we would still want to say that the OU(K) governs
an implied DIKAIOUTAI carried forward from the preceding clause.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:50 EDT